| From: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Andreas Pflug" <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3 |
| Date: | 2007-06-18 15:19:01 |
| Message-ID: | 1182179941.6855.191.camel@silverbirch.site |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 16:56 +0200, Andreas Pflug wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > The objections to applying this patch originally were:
> > 2. it would restrict number of digits to 508 and there are allegedly
> > some people that want to store > 508 digits.
> >
> If 508 digits are not enough, are1000 digits be sufficient? Both limits
> appear quite arbitrary to me.
Thats the current limit; I agree, but I didn't choose it. IIRC if you
don't specify a limit then you can have arbitrarily long numbers.
--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paesold | 2007-06-18 15:24:16 | Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3 |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-06-18 15:18:47 | Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3 |